Case 3311381/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Matthew Dawson v M4 Specialist — 2023
- Case reference
- 3311381/2022
- Decision date
- 30 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Matthew Dawson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Matthew Dawson did not attend the hearing on 9 June 2023 at Reading. Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto considered the information before the tribunal and dismissed the claim. The written reasons state that the claim had been presented outside the time limit for presentation of complaints.
The tribunal also noted that the respondent, M4 Specialist Limited, was not the claimant's employer. On those grounds, the tribunal dismissed the claim. No remedy or monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not spell out the underlying label in the reasons, but the case metadata listed unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal dismissed the claim because it was presented outside the time limit and because the respondent was not the claimant's employer. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment does not spell out the underlying label in the reasons, but the case metadata listed a Working Time Regulations claim. The tribunal dismissed the claim because it was presented outside the time limit and because the respondent was not the claimant's employer. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.